comment on

Another pro is that the core code can always use more review. There are bugs, and sometimes they are surprisingly findable.

For instance Ovid also wrote use CGI or die;, which includes among the benefits of CGI.pm that hand-rolled solutions don't tend to test $ENV{CONTENT-LENGTH} to catch aborted downloads. Well it was by reading the source-code that I found that a hard-to-debug problem happened because CGI.pm didn't either on a regular POST. (Only on a multi-part post.)

And even if you don't find any bugs in reviewing a bunch of that code, you will get insight into ways that very smart people who you have never met think. This is never a bad thing (even if the state of the art has progressed).

For a possible, if anyone wants to read Code Reading: The Open Source Perspective and get back on how it is, I would be interesting. I would have read it, but I have been busy learning stuff (eg Oracle) for a new job...

In reply to Re: Reasons for looking at your favourite module's source by tilly
in thread Reasons for looking at your favourite module's source by liz

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


Perl: the Markov chain saw
	PerlMonks